By Daniel L. Bamberg
Daniel@Centrevillepress.com
Joe B. Martin and Roselynn M. Pittman, both residents and registered voters within the Centreville city limits, have filed a court action on Monday May 17th with the Bibb County Circuit Court. This action is to contest of the results of the recent wet/dry election held in Centreville on May 11, 2010.
The vote, which was held on May 15, 2010, was for the purpose of citizens either approving or denying the legal sale of alcohol within the city limits. The walk-ins ballots in Centreville approved the sale of alcohol by a margin of 7 votes. The absentee ballots, however, denied the legal sale of alcohol by a margin of 12 votes. Thusly, the city of Centreville remained “dry” by 5 votes.
The following Friday a recount was held in order to confirm the absentee ballots. 10 absentee ballots were challenged based on voter incapacity. The result of the recount, although 10 less in total votes, ended with the same result in terms of voter margin. The City of Centreville was again “dry” by a total margin of 5 votes. Due to this result the city planned to include the challenged 10 absentee ballots as provisional ballots.
The contest of the election was filed as it is written, “to preserve the public interest in the integrity of the voting process and to demand strict compliance with the voting laws of the State of Alabama for municipal elections.”
This contest is well within the right of the two citizens based on the Code of Alabama. The two claim to have personal knowledge that absentee ballots were received improperly during this election. Details of exactly how these “ballots in question” were received are presently unknown or unconfirmed. The amount of “ballots in question” is also presently unknown.
According to Centreville City Attorney, Mike Hobson, there are only two ways an absentee ballot can be received legally. The first way to cast an absentee ballot legally is in person by the voter on the ballot. The second being through the U.S. Post Office Mail postmarked with the legal residence of the voter. Also, all absentee ballots are to be witnessed and notarized before delivery. According to Hobson, any other such ways of delivery and receipt would be deemed improper.
The plaintiffs, Martin and Pittman, allege that if these votes are disqualified the result of the election will be different.
“The challenge to the election contest is based on technical errors based on how the absentee ballots were delivered to the city hall. There is no suggestion that the city or the absentee manager did anything purposely to change the outcome of this election. In this case it is simply that they didn’t know the law,” explained Hobson.
Due to this action the City of Centreville did not certify the election results during the city council meeting on Tuesday, May 18th, as advised by the city attorney. Circuit Judge Marvin Wiggins was assigned to oversee the case, on Wednesday, May 19th. According to Hobson, Wiggins is presently aware of the details of the case. Hobson also estimates that the decision to hold a public hearing on this election will likely be made within a week or so.
In this case, Mike Hobson will be the attorney representing the City of Centreville and representing the plaintiffs will be John Morrison an attorney from McCalla.
No comments:
Post a Comment